“Easy answers elude Mich., Fla. Delegates,” reads a headline this morning.
Ridiculous. The answer is: Don't change the rules in the middle of the game.
As AP writer, Nedra Pickler, explains:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton desperately wants meaningless wins in Florida and Michigan to turn into votes she can count on. It won't be easy with the Democratic National Committee (DNC) rules standing in her way.This means that Clinton, facing a declining delegate count, wants to change the rules of the game now that she is losing, as the DNC and Michigan and Florida last year could not agree on the timing of the states' presidential elections.
Had the two states stayed with their scheduled election dates, Michigan would be decisive as an early-March state, and Florida would have likely given Clinton a victory on Super Tuesday.
Clinton’s previous stance on the issue when polls had her winning the nomination in a run-away, was that Michigan and Florida should not have their delegates seated, and all the candidates agreed not to campaign in the two states.
Now Clinton is singing a different tune.
Writes Pickler:
"I think that the people of Michigan and Florida spoke in a very convincing way, that they want their voices and their votes to be heard," Clinton told reporters. "The turnout in both places was record-breaking and I think that that should be respected."
Sure, but nobody campaigned there, as agreed by all candidates.
One easy answer that is a take-away from this controversy: Clinton will do and say pretty much anything to win.
###
That seems a little unfair. We got Obama whining about the Super Delegates when that has been set for several decades.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me irrelevant that Clinton wants them now counted. The Florida and Michigan voters should not have been disenfranchised in the first place. They and the local parties had little agency in the decision making process. The rules were an undemocratic, top down power grab.
Yes, Hillary's tune would be different if she did not win both states, but who cares. Its not about Hillary but disenfranchised voters.
It seems to me saying changing the rules in the middle of the game is wrong, it a historically inaccurate examination of power plays that occurred by the DNC.
The DNC has been heavy-handed before, yes.
ReplyDeleteBut we know what Hillary is doing: Going down to Fla and claiming victory on meaningless election night, Pretending to be on Fla and MI's side now that she is losing, one can go on.
As for super delegates, I think the expressed concern informs the delegates that insiders contradicting the voters' will would result in losing the voters, as is the voters' right.
That's a false dichotomy.
#